+\ a-\ /i
. -
ORlGlNAL
C OURT OF CHANCERY
OF T"E
S T A T E O F D E L A W A R E
September
William Prickett, Esquire Lawrence A. Hamermesh, Esquire
Michael Hanrahan, Esquire Thomas C. Grimm, Esquire
Elizabeth M. McGeever, Esquire Leone L. Ciporin, Esquire
Joseph Grey, Esquire Morris, Nichols, Arsht &
Prickett, Jones, Elliott, Tunnel1
Kristol E; Schnee 1202 N. Market Street
1310 King Street P. 0. Box I347
P. 0. Box 1328 Wilmington, Delaware 19899
Wilmington, Delawawre 19899
James F. Burnett, Esquire Allen M. Terrell, Jr., Esqui?i$
Donald J. Wolfe, Jr., Esquire Michael J. Feinstein, Es&ire _,_
Potter Anderson & Corroon Richards, Layton & Finger - -.-
350 Delaware Trust Building One Rodney Square
P. 0. Box 951 P. 0. Box 55.l. _-
Wilmington, Delaware 19899 Wilmington, Delaware 19839 :T.
- r ._
Lawrence C. Ashby, Esquire -. -
h'
Stephen E. *Jenkins, Esquire 1
Ashby, McKeLvie & Geddes
One Rodney ISquare
P. 0. Box 1347
Wilmington, Delaware 19899
RE: In Re: Tri-Star Pictures, Inc., Litigation
Consolidated Civil Action No. 9477
Date Submitted: September 7
- , 1989
Dear Counse1:
The plaintiff has moved for the entry of final judgment
pursuant to Court of Chancery Rule 54(b). Plaintiff's purpose
in seeking .this relief is to take an immediate appeal from
this Court's decision granting, in part, the defendants'
motions to dismiss plaintiff's complaint pursuant to Chancery
Court Rule 12(b)(6). Those rulings and their basis are set
All Counsel
SNIPPETS:
The plaintiff has moved for the entry of final judgment
motions to dismiss plaintiff's complaint pursuant to Chancery
Plaintiff filed this action on behalf of a class of public shareholders of Tri-Star, Inc. and
now asks the Court, under Rule 54, to enter final judgment with respect to its dismissal of
Chancery Court Rule 54pertinently provides that:
When more than 1 claim for relief is
A l l Counsel September 26,
Thus, for the Court to grant the plaintiff's motion, it must find that: the action involves
delaying an appeal is addressed to the sound discretion of the Court.
against piecemeal appeals requires that this Court exercise
create "a discretionary power to afford a remedy in the
unless the moving party can show 'some danger of hardship or injustice through delay which
has not made that showing either as to the Article Seventh claim or as to his claims against
plaintiff has not shown that his inability to appeal his Article Seventh claim now would
Article Seventh, by its terms, automatically incorporates any future amendments to the
Plaintiff argues that directors of Delaware corporations would continue to enjoy the
622 F.2d 944, 951 (7th Cir.
judicial administration favors not fostering the piecemeal appeal of closely related causes
|
